I remember the day Shawn Kemp said he'd NEVER wear a Supersonics uniform again. It was after Wally Walker gave an outrageous contract to Jim McClivane. IIRC, Kemp had been told for some time he'd be getting a new contract, and he took offense of the organization taking care of an outsider before himself.

I have to wonder if Seattle's kind of in the same boat.

Especially (and almost exclusively) defensively, they're alot of players playing under VERY modest rookie/UDFA contracts. And, there's a real sense of family between all of them. I have to wonder if a Revis, Avril, Dockett (for example) coming in with a hefty contract would subconsciously have players saying "umm, that aint right". Especially on a team which sucked, got better, and became a legit together.

Good post. I've been thinking a lot about this exact scenario since the Revis rumors started up. I think it would, especially in the case of Revis. Sherman would not take kindly to that, I'm quite certain.

SuperHawks wrote:Good post. I've been thinking a lot about this exact scenario since the Revis rumors started up. I think it would, especially in the case of Revis. Sherman would not take kindly to that, I'm quite certain.

Posssibly, and you have to think that Schneid's philosphy of building from within through the draft would support not bringing in big-$ FAs.

IMHO, that part of the rebuilding process is pretty much behind us, and we're going to disappoint a lot of fans who want such signings this year and moving forward. The holes we do have in the roster don't really require that kind of move IAE. We're already a playoff caliber team, we can afford to draft and develop players now more so than in the past 3 years. The one big problem we have-pass rush, especially interior pass rush from DTs-I expect to see a classic Pete Carroll approach. Bring in 10-12 new guys on top of what we already have and let them fight it out. It wouldn't surprise me to see 15-20 D-linemen in camp this year. Yeah, I would not be surprised to see 20-25% of our pre-season roster dedicated to this.

Talent can get you to the playoffs.It takes character to win when you get there.SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS

kinesmajor wrote:Yes and no. These players know under the CBA that they can do nothing about rookie contracts.

Ofcourse they all want more money. Don't we all? But what Seattle is paying free agents sets a precedent of what they are willing to pay once the contracts have been fulfilled

Now with Pete's open competition, no free agent will be able to come in with an attitude and expect to be the man. They will have to work hard and fit in or ride the bench/be cut real quick.

Referencing your last statement there, it is exactly why big-$ FAs would avoid coming here. Under that philosophy, they won't get the big signing bonuses many will want. They may get roster bonuses, awarded if they make the team, but many/most will not sign those deals, and their agents won't like them either.

The whole P&J philosophy, as I read it, is to move away from FA moves and toward building through the draft. Not that they won't, but they will definitely do it smart, which means many FAs and their agents will shy away.

Talent can get you to the playoffs.It takes character to win when you get there.SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS

I'd bring in the guy from New England for three years. Cu him after that.

Seller. Sorry that's who I meant...pay him and leave him. Any more than that at this point for him is bad money for his age I think. Work under neath and knows how to prepare for games week in and out...not a locker room cancer

I wouldn't compare this to basketball. On this team, a hypothetical free agent would be one of 52 players. This team is deep and young enough to be able to bring in a guy like that here and there. The Patriots have been doing it for years.

I'm not in favor of Revis anyway, but I'm thinking more of a guy like Osi Umenyiora. This team is a modest pass rush away from having a championship squad.

Rat wrote:I wouldn't compare this to basketball. On this team, a hypothetical free agent would be one of 52 players. This team is deep and young enough to be able to bring in a guy like that here and there. The Patriots have been doing it for years.

I'm not in favor of Revis anyway, but I'm thinking more of a guy like Osi Umenyiora. This team is a modest pass rush away from having a championship squad.

Osi's cheap. You're smart enough to understand despite using the Supes an example.

Rat wrote:I wouldn't compare this to basketball. On this team, a hypothetical free agent would be one of 52 players. This team is deep and young enough to be able to bring in a guy like that here and there. The Patriots have been doing it for years.

I'm not in favor of Revis anyway, but I'm thinking more of a guy like Osi Umenyiora. This team is a modest pass rush away from having a championship squad.

Osi's cheap. You're smart enough to understand despite using the Supes an example.

I disagree. Osi has been complaining about his contract for years and plays a premier position. He won't command Revis money, but he'll be far from cheap.

Dwayne Bowe is another example, if you like that one better. I'd have no problem bringing him in.

I think it only messes with chemistry if certain players feel they aren't getting enough respect/money. If you either pay those deserving players or at least make the promise you will when you can, with CBA restrictions in mind, than I don't think it would mess things up.

Now, there is a risk if this front office isn't 100% committed to those players who feel they deserve a pay raise (maybe Kam Chancellor?) We all saw what happened when Irvin was drafted. Clemons wanted a new contract and there was a chance he was going to hold out for 2012 if he wasn't paid. If we trade for Revis and give him a big contract, how does Chancellor feel if he doesn't get extended this offseason?

Now slightly different examples, but in both ways, each player was/is threatened with a new player addition. In Clemon's example, it was his position. In Chancellor's example, it's not having enough cap money to extend him this year.

"People who don't punch their ponies in the face make me sick." - Louis C.K.

Yeah, Osi's not getting a long term contract. It was well known that Osi was available for trade the last couple years and nobody even tried seriously to get him. He turns 32 during the next NFL season. I'd be surprised if anyone offered him more than 2 years.

pehawk wrote:Oh, I didn't know Osi's gonna get anything more than a 1-2 year deal. Do tell.

I have no idea how much he'll get, but based on how much he's whined about his contract in recent years, I just don't see him signing a 1 year $4 million contract. There will be enough demand for him, given the position he plays. Every year, we see these contracts that surprise people. Hugh Douglas was about the same age as Osi when he hit free agency, and got 5 years $27 million, and that was ten years ago.

SuperHawks wrote:Good post. I've been thinking a lot about this exact scenario since the Revis rumors started up. I think it would, especially in the case of Revis. Sherman would not take kindly to that, I'm quite certain.

And, Sherman would have a point, IMO.

I tend to agree with the Sherman gig, because most of the players don't feel that they are too far away from that brass ring, er, should I say Super Bowl Ring, although I believe that we are lacking in certain areas (crushing Defensive line) (Pass Rush), that they feel is not getting it done with certain players on the roster.I think they realize that with the right moves to fill the open holes, they wouldn't object to it.Revi$ would probably create a controver$y though.

pehawk wrote:Oh, I didn't know Osi's gonna get anything more than a 1-2 year deal. Do tell.

I have no idea how much he'll get, but based on how much he's whined about his contract in recent years, I just don't see him signing a 1 year $4 million contract. There will be enough demand for him, given the position he plays. Every year, we see these contracts that surprise people. Hugh Douglas was about the same age as Osi when he hit free agency, and got 5 years $27 million, and that was ten years ago.

I have often seen teams give money to a "really good" free agent and they don't play anywhere near the hype that got them the money. Too often too many players once they get the money they lose the passion. Players need to show that they deserve the good money before they get it. Sorry but I don't like how much some of these ego trips get paid before they even show their goods. It is like purchasing something on line then when it gets there it doesn't do half of what it was said to do.

Tech Worlds wrote:Do you think for one min that Russell Wilson will allow anyone on this team to not dial it up based on what someone else is getting paid?

This team has leadership. Not worried one bit.

This is kind of how I feel. There's leadership, there's professionalism, and there's direction. It's a team with their eyes set on the Super Bowl and not so much on their own contracts...I hope.

I'd like to think that Sherman is the kind of guy who looks for his validation in his accomplishments on the field, in the media's acknowledgement of the Seahawks' talent, and in the W column. I hope he's not also going to look to the size of the contract the Seahawks give him. Countless players around the league get paid exorbitant sums, and they never sniff the playoffs. Will this perspective enable Sherman to look past a Revis-sized contract and play for the real honors?

"We don't even need your stupid a-- that much. We can win Super Bowls with retired Kerry f------- Collins right now, and you want to be the highest paid player of all-time? F--- you." - Tical21 to Russell Wilson, 6/30/15

Kixkahn wrote:I have often seen teams give money to a "really good" free agent and they don't play anywhere near the hype that got them the money. Too often too many players once they get the money they lose the passion. Players need to show that they deserve the good money before they get it. Sorry but I don't like how much some of these ego trips get paid before they even show their goods. It is like purchasing something on line then when it gets there it doesn't do half of what it was said to do.

Boy ain't that the truth.That's why I really like the "Incentive Clause" tied to some of those signings.

Tech Worlds wrote:Do you think for one min that Russell Wilson will allow anyone on this team to not dial it up based on what someone else is getting paid?

This team has leadership. Not worried one bit.

This is kind of how I feel. There's leadership, there's professionalism, and there's direction. It's a team with their eyes set on the Super Bowl and not so much on their own contracts...I hope.

I'd like to think that Sherman is the kind of guy who looks for his validation in his accomplishments on the field, in the media's acknowledgement of the Seahawks' talent, and in the W column. I hope he's not also going to look to the size of the contract the Seahawks give him. Countless players around the league get paid exorbitant sums, and they never sniff the playoffs. Will this perspective enable Sherman to look past a Revis-sized contract and play for the real honors?

That all sounds good on the surface, but not so much under the skin.In real life, money greases the wheels, and if a player doesn't receive recognition on payday for giving his all, and sees another skimming the cream off the top?

It seems to me that this fo has always stood for the fact that you play well, you get paid. They have stated that its their position to retain players from within that perform. If a FA comes in and gets better money, then maybe the person playing the position previously didn't warrent the bigger bucks.This is the business end and the players know it, although don't like it, i'm sure.

The bigger problem with the Jimmy Mac signing was that Kemp, aside from that outsider being taken care of first, when he had been promised a max deal by the Ackerleys which didn't happen, he also saw what we all saw. The Sonics signed a guy that sucked and wasn't going to help the team. That money was now gone, and less money was available to take care of the guys who were already there. Now.... if they had signed even Dikembe Mutombo I don't think the reaction is the same, because Shawn and everybody else sees that the team will improve on the inside, this will open up opportunities for Shawn, including more points, a better shot at a title, endorsements, etc. He didn't feel Mac did anything but waste money. I felt the same. It was a godawful signing.

As a Seahawks player you look at the big signing and say, "Hmmm... does this take us to the next level?" If it does? Then you like it, because it increases your value. Look at how much our coordinators value went up after this year. If the Hawks win a Superbowl Richard Sherman's value jumps considerably. Does he care who pays him? Probably not. He just wants to get a buttload of money from somebody. We'd all like to believe he wants to stay a Hawk for life, but I don't think many major leaguers think that way.

If I were on the Hawks and I saw Osi and Dockett brought in, I'd be absolutely ecstatic, especially if I'm a DB, because it makes my job easier, and helps me get more INT's from the defensive pressure on the QB. As a LBer I'd be happy as I see the fact that the front pressure helps me in my assignments. If I'm an offensive player, I'm happy, because then our game winning drives with a minute left are much less likely to end in a loss.

I think the players are smart enough to see an upgrade when one comes along. It isn't "not paying your current guys" if you sign somebody at a position of weakness or where we have nobody under contract. Jones is a free agent, I believe Branch is a free agent. We have Mebane, Irvin, and Clemons making the majority of the money on the line, and Clemons is hurt, and the other guys will go get their best deal. I'd gladly swap out branch and jones and end up with Dockett. I think the whole team would be stoked to have him, because he is the exact type of player we need in the middle (If not the exact guy, then he is the type we need for sure).

Green Bay is the model, last real big FA they brought in was Woodson, they take care of their own, if the player gets to long in the tooth or too expensive they let him go. At the very least as John has done they say go ahead and look and come back and let us know how ya did after an offer was tabled and not taken.

The exception is key positions like QB or maybe CB's and pass rushers. You seen how they don't pay the big dollars to RB's there, some of the ones they and wanted big dollars and they either cut or let them go. They also have had issues with the running game there recently as well. Could be a error on their judgement of the ability of the guys behind them or the line not opening up holes. But the point I was making is they take care of their own and don't pay for FA's with big contracts.

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.

If we brought in Dockett who has produced it would be a lot like Reggie White in GB, you have no doubt what your getting. Signing a guy that doesn't have a history for more then the guys here would be an issue. Osi has been whineing for years in NY, he isn't young, been injured. I don't think that attitude would fly here since he comes across as I'm bigger then the team.

Osi was impressive early on granted, but he would need to be screened well to make sure that his skill set was not eroded, I would still make it a incentive laden contract never the less if he did sign, and make it a Jones type deal with the produce and you can get a second chance on the market type.

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.

I don't think so. Guys like Wilson, Sherman and Thomas know that it's the NFLPA and that agreement that sets the rules. However at the end of the rookie contract they will expect to be paid.

In the case of Flynn they disparity is so large I think that could be an issue. The team seems to really like Wilson on a personal level. Flynn rarely sees game time and sits. That I think could be aggravating to the team as a whole.

Tech Worlds wrote:Do you think for one min that Russell Wilson will allow anyone on this team to not dial it up based on what someone else is getting paid?

This team has leadership. Not worried one bit.

This..

Seahawks have a good leader, and now that he's not a rookie anymore. It will only add to the respect Russell Wilson has already earned. Sherman is painted as the biggest D-bag in the NFL by the major sports media outlets (ESPN, FOX, CBS and even the NFL's own website), but seeing him on the Real Rob Report and various local interviews says differently. Sherman was one of the few guys that actually got of his vehicle to personally thank fans, sign autographs and pose for pictures when hundreds of Seahawks fans showed up at the VMAC to congratulate the Hawks for having a great season. Even after the heart breaking loss in Atlanta.

I think Richard Sherman knows his pay day is coming, so he'll keep his mouth shut and play ball (even if he doesn't like a high priced corner like Revis coming in). Sherm may run his mouth on the field but he's not like a Terrell Owens, who talks trash about his teammates as well as opponents. Besides, Sherman has shown he can back up everything he says. Unlike TO's last two seasons in the NFL, he was often shut down by younger/faster DB's and still ran his mouth at or about them.

Last edited by Zowert on Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Tech Worlds wrote:Do you think for one min that Russell Wilson will allow anyone on this team to not dial it up based on what someone else is getting paid?

This team has leadership. Not worried one bit.

This is kind of how I feel. There's leadership, there's professionalism, and there's direction. It's a team with their eyes set on the Super Bowl and not so much on their own contracts...I hope.

I'd like to think that Sherman is the kind of guy who looks for his validation in his accomplishments on the field, in the media's acknowledgement of the Seahawks' talent, and in the W column. I hope he's not also going to look to the size of the contract the Seahawks give him. Countless players around the league get paid exorbitant sums, and they never sniff the playoffs. Will this perspective enable Sherman to look past a Revis-sized contract and play for the real honors?

That all sounds good on the surface, but not so much under the skin.In real life, money greases the wheels, and if a player doesn't receive recognition on payday for giving his all, and sees another skimming the cream off the top?

Cynicism agrees with you, but every time I've brought my cynicism into my opinions on the Pete Carroll Seahawks, I've been proven wrong.

"We don't even need your stupid a-- that much. We can win Super Bowls with retired Kerry f------- Collins right now, and you want to be the highest paid player of all-time? F--- you." - Tical21 to Russell Wilson, 6/30/15

Depends on the who and the what i'd reckon. If it's a position of need like 3-tech or Will LB and a guy who fits the system, I can't see any of our guys getting too bent out of shape if we bring in a free agent to better the team.

I also can't see JS over-pay for an aging FA with limited d upside the way Timmy used to. If he brings somebody in, it'll either be a young guy with lots of tread left on the tires like Sidney and Zack or a vet at a reasonable price (and a short deal) who fills a need like Raheem Brock or Brandon Stokley.

I trust that the current regime understands that the team is greater than the sum of its parts and that a big ticket FA signing can do just as much harm as good. I'm not too worried about them making a move that screws with team chemistry (and I highly doubt they trade for Revis).

This poster officially refuses to recognize SacHawk2.0 as a moderator or authority figure of any description.

The FO is very wary of the type of player they bring into the locker room. They did bring in Winslow, TO and Edwards but didn't seem to hear a peep out of any of them, even after they walked. Then again all were descending in value to a team versus a young player getting his second contract or a Revis coming in on an expired re-negotiated deal.

It is a fine line and the days of letting a Housh walk with $6M is probably over. Even though the FO has done a yeoman's job of getting things on track, just like some fans, there are probably advisers to Paul Allen that will talk about the money paid to Whitehurst and Flynn which will keep the FO from just letting competition be the only criteria for retaining players.

The financial commitment made to Red is an example where the team cannot just declare they are going to move away from the current DL construction. But that is another story. Yet this is an example of how a veteran coming in will recognize he is untouchable for the most part. And that could lead to chemistry issues.

It is an interesting consideration the FO has to weigh when reaching out to a targeted FA.

Sherman has mentioned, a few times, he "starved" at Stanford. He brought up the standard argument of the NCAA raking in the cash while student athletes, like him, are starving. Sherman’s fight over the urine sample attacked the system, for himself and future players. He thinks and talks like a DeSmith or Upshaw (without the being Roger or Paul's fluffer part).

Hypothetically, given who Sherman is, I could see him voicing some questions if a Revis was brought in. Not in a selfish manner, but as a voice for the rookies footing the bill in the new CBA.

Would it be an issue? Most likely not. But, the reason I believe in this team is their personalities and bond. A high-paid outsider, could in theory, disrupt that.

It's the offseason, time to make up isht to discuss. And, while this scenario is unlikely, I bet it's some the front office is cognoscente of.

I don't believe this mentality is present in the locker room. When Pete and John pay to bring someone in, they have to fight to play. Flynn is the perfect example, they obviously thought he would win the competition but when Wilson won it, they had to stay true to the "I'm In" always compete mantra. Now, bringing in another player means the players here already have to perform and beat them out to play, contracts are a separate issue and when their contracts are up, they will get paid. Clemons, Bryant, Mebane, Lynch, and Unger(Awesome, got the extention before the pro-bowl year) got paid. Players know that Seattle isn't going to low ball our top performers so Thomas and Sherman don't have anything to worry about, they'll get paid by keeping it up. I don't think the chemistry will be effected since this issue is part of Pete's philosophy and mantra.

What if Revis comes in and kicks ass? That would set us up for a solid season in the secondary with the outside shut down, offenses play book is down to a lot less plays and only have to worry about the underneath/middle.

Still thinking that this trade for Revis business is an effort to get a team like San Fran to pay up a crap ton of picks and players to get Revis, setting up the Jets with Idzik and ripping off the niners.

SuperHawks wrote:Good post. I've been thinking a lot about this exact scenario since the Revis rumors started up. I think it would, especially in the case of Revis. Sherman would not take kindly to that, I'm quite certain.

Valid point, IF we could negotiate a fat contract with Sherman. But since we can't per CBA rules, I would think that they would be happy wi making the team better.

SuperHawks wrote:Good post. I've been thinking a lot about this exact scenario since the Revis rumors started up. I think it would, especially in the case of Revis. Sherman would not take kindly to that, I'm quite certain.

Valid point, IF we could negotiate a fat contract with Sherman. But since we can't per CBA rules, I would think that they would be happy wi making the team better.

And did the OP really compare Darrell Revis to Jim McIlvane?

They're both white, crew-cuts AND lead the NBA in blocks per minute at one point.

SuperHawks wrote:Good post. I've been thinking a lot about this exact scenario since the Revis rumors started up. I think it would, especially in the case of Revis. Sherman would not take kindly to that, I'm quite certain.

Valid point, IF we could negotiate a fat contract with Sherman. But since we can't per CBA rules, I would think that they would be happy wi making the team better.

And did the OP really compare Darrell Revis to Jim McIlvane?

They're both white, crew-cuts AND lead the NBA in blocks per minute at one point.

If you've proven can draft all-pro/pro bowl caliber players consistently in the mid-rounds and pay them $500k/year for four years, why would you ever bring in a guy coming off an ACL injury and pay him bank from the get-go?

SuperHawks wrote:Good post. I've been thinking a lot about this exact scenario since the Revis rumors started up. I think it would, especially in the case of Revis. Sherman would not take kindly to that, I'm quite certain.

And, Sherman would have a point, IMO.

His only point is that the CBA should have included provisions to allow teams to reward their rookies with new deals sooner than 3 years into the deal.

Not like Richard Sherman is never getting paid. If anything, he should root for Revis as Revis will probably set Sherman's value.

SuperHawks wrote:Good post. I've been thinking a lot about this exact scenario since the Revis rumors started up. I think it would, especially in the case of Revis. Sherman would not take kindly to that, I'm quite certain.

And, Sherman would have a point, IMO.

I tend to agree with the Sherman gig, because most of the players don't feel that they are too far away from that brass ring, er, should I say Super Bowl Ring, although I believe that we are lacking in certain areas (crushing Defensive line) (Pass Rush), that they feel is not getting it done with certain players on the roster.I think they realize that with the right moves to fill the open holes, they wouldn't object to it.Revi$ would probably create a controver$y though.

If we brought in Revis we might as well trade Sherman. If this was the '05 team we might bring him in for one last shot at SB and let him walk after that. Obviously we are still young and building so bringing him in means we would be looking at signing him long term. Say he gets $16 mill per year then Sherman would be looking for that or more. Can't afford both of them plus Thomas and Wilson. Not to mention our All Pro lineman and other impact players that might not demand much money but enough that having both Revis/Sherman will make it difficult to sign them.

There are 5 guys on this team that we need to get on long term deals when the CBA allows (Sherman, Thomas, Wilson, Okung, and Wagner). Yeah we have $18.5 mill cap space right now. Signing a big $$$$ free agent will likely mean one or two of them have to go. So that guy better damn well be the best at his position for the next 5 years. Not gonna happen.

Would bringing in a high dollar free agent mess with Chemistry? It would if we got a high dollar defensive back. I, simply, don't see any place for a high profile free agent defensive back in our secondary. Lane is on the up and capable of challenging Browner at RCB along with Trufant at Nickel. Jeron Johnson is an amazing backup safety for us, whether many realize it or not. He can play either safety position extremely well and he's a playmaker. I can see us signing a high profile free agent or two, but I don't see us signing a high profile DB.

High profile free agents I could see us targeting and high profile free agents that wouldn't mess with team chemistry too much in my opinion. I could see us signing one, maybe 2, of these guys. Otherwise, I think the rest of the players are resigns or way under-the-radar players.

Brian Hartline - Will probably be available in free agency if Miami uses their franchise tag and/or transition tag on Jake Long, Reggie Bush or Randy Starks. His size and ability compliment Wilson's throwing style and he compliments the other receivers on our roster. I think Hartline would be a great fit for our receiving corp.

Glenn Dorsey - He's younger than Branch and he'll probably cost less than Branch. Get him back to playing in the 4-3 like he was at LSU and he might become the disruptive force in the backfield everybody thought he should've been when he was a top 10 pick in the 2008 Draft. KC shouldn't tag him when they have Bowe and Albert to worry about. He'd compliment Mebane, Howard and McDonald very well in my opinion.

Desmond Bryant - This would be an FA steal for the Seahawks if we can get him away from the Raiders at the right price. A young up-and-comer that performed very well last year for a struggling Raiders team. The Raiders are in cap trouble, so they might not give up what Bryant's worth.

Doug Legursky - He's played C, OT and OG admirably well for the Steelers. I'd love to see him come in and press the issue with our interior line. Our offensive line is a promising unit that's coming together, but I wouldn't let any of these guys think they're the slated starter. Legursky presses the competition and brings a lot of experience to the unit.